Michigan’s Attorney General, Dana Nessel (AG), has launched a preliminary effort to set up a climate lawsuit against fossil fuel companies which benefited “from their actions for the damage they have caused and are causing”. The AG is currently soliciting proposals from attorneys and law firms to assist with the climate litigation.
According to the AG, climate change impacts are affecting the Michigan way of life, identity, and economy. State-specific impacts include a shortened ski season and affected tulip crops. Yet, despite these adverse impacts, fossil fuel companies continue to prioritise their profit-making pollution over caring for the environment.
The decades-long awareness the fossil fuel industry has had of the negative climate impacts of their operations, as well as the industry’s deceit of the general public are cited as important context to the lawsuit.
Yet, despite the AG’s commitment to enforcing Michigan’s environmental statutes, “[t]he regulatory framework alone may not fully account for the damage caused by fossil fuel product use and emissions”. The AG is therefore looking to use constitutional, statutory, tort, and other common law strategies to pursue the fossil fuel industry.
The attorneys and law firms the AG is soliciting will be needed to identify climate litigation strategies and defendants and to pursue claims, actions and potential appeals.
Michigan’s legal action would join a trend of successful, unsuccessful and ongoing United States state suits against the fossil fuel industry, including Rhode Island, New York, Massachusetts, Minnesota, the District of Columbia, Delaware, Connecticut, California, New Jersey, and Vermont.
Climate litigation against the fossil fuel industry is yet to show a real direct financial impact on the industry, according to a recent report by S&P Global Ratings. However, climate litigation impact goes beyond mere financial impact. Companies may suffer from indirect impacts through consumer awareness. Moreover, as climate litigation becomes more prevalent and understood, shareholders may be increasingly weary of litigation risk.
A study in 2023 found that “a filing or an unfavourable court decision in a climate case reduced firm value by -0.41% on average”. However, this effect is more pronounced in cases filed against major fossil fuel industry players.
Comments